Why Doesn’t Fox Like To Say The Words ‘Right-Wing Terrorism?’

If you watch Fox News for any length of time, it’s nearly impossible to avoid either a host or an esteemed guest condemnPresidentObama for not calling either the Boston Marathon bombing or the Fort Hood shooting, “Islamic terrorism.” As if fighting terrorism rests on what you call it. But yesterday, the FBI arrested a right-wing militia-type extremist who allegedly wanted to bomb a local police department. And Fox News is barely mentioning it at all, much less calling it “right wing terrorism.”

Eric Boehlert at Media Matters writes about the arrest of Buford Rogers in Minnesota:

You will likely not be surprised that none of Fox News’ primetime hosts mentioned the Rogers arrest last night or the looming threat of right-wing extremist violence. That, despite the fact the shows have dedicated countless programming hours in recent weeks to ginning up fear and angst surrounding the terror attack in Boston on Patriot’s Day.

It’s true Fox has included a number of on-air mentions about the Minnesota terror news during its daytime programming. But what makes Fox’s ho-hum coverage noteworthy is the contrast to its interest in making sweeping generalizations about the Islamic community when terror plots have included Muslims Muslim suspects (or, as we saw with the misguided post-Boston obsession with the “Saudi national,” Muslim victims).

Boehlert notes that right-wing extremist attacks are a significant threat. Last year, Think Progress found “Fifty-six percent of domestic terrorist attacks and plots in the U.S. since 1995 have been perpetrated by right-wing extremists.” More recently the Southern Poverty Law Center came out with a report on the rise of anti-government “patriot” groups. The SPLC concluded, “As President Obama enters his second term with an agenda of gun control and immigration reform, the rage on the right is likely to intensify.”

Another staple of Fox News’ recent coverage is a collectiveoutrage at the lack of “mainstream media” coverage of the Kermit Gosnell trial. Putting aside questions about why a news network would spend so much airtime whining what other networks are not covering (instead of just covering whatever news they think important), this begs questions about Fox News’ own selectivity.

Memo to Fox News: If it’s so important to put labels on terrorism, you’ve got some labeling of your own to do. And some 'splaining about your own selective coverage. Or, maybe you could just stop the fear mongering and showing all Americans the same respect and restraint you display towards the right wing.

Showing 2 reactions

Connor Steven, the leader of the Ohio Bridge bombing plot said outright that him and the others were cruising the Tea Party for members because they wanted the immunity that comes with being tied to their breed of right wing extremism. He cited names like Ezell Harris, Jerry Kane, JT Ready, Michael Kubolinicky, and Nova Guffey as examples of Tea Party offenders who were not only exempt from media scrutiny, but the ones who were taken alive were intervened for by the GOP with the law.

He also admitted that he got a job with Occupy partially so that he saw the Tea Party plants that were egging on the police as especially prized prospects. As he put it, they were the ones that were the most prone to action, and they were already exercising ideas on how to pin their actions on others, should the results make the news. So he got himself a position to find out who they were.